For a group that continuously pleads for “tolerance,” liberals are the most intolerant people you will ever meet. To them, “tolerance” means that we must accept their values as being equal – nay, superior – to our own. Here’s a case in point:
In California, back in 2001, a lesbian couple wanted to have a child via artificial insemination. However, the medical practice where they sought services was owned by two Christian doctors who refused to provide the service because of their religious beliefs. Rather than respecting the doctors’ beliefs, the intolerant lesbians sued saying they were being discriminated against. The case made its way to the CA Supreme Court which ruled against the doctors. I guess the doctors’ right to practice their religion (which is supposed to be protected by the First Amendment) is trumped by some un-enumerated “right” to be gay. The parties have recently reached a settlement ending the case.
Oh, by the way, the couple did get the service performed elsewhere and have had 3 children since filing this lawsuit. So it’s not that they couldn’t get the procedure – they were just mad because they couldn’t get it from these Christian doctors. The plaintiff’s attorney said, “It shows a journey that our whole society is taking together, away from intolerance and towards inclusion.” Give me a break. Why couldn’t the gay couple have been tolerant of the doctors’ religious beliefs?
And if you think I’m exaggerating, let me direct your attention to the Hatch Amendment that was defeated in Senate committee yesterday. By a vote of 13-10, the committee members voted down an amendment to the controversial health care bill that would have strengthened existing conscience laws that allow doctors and hospitals to refuse to provide abortions on religious grounds. If health care reform is passed, Christian doctors, nurses, and hospitals could someday be forced to provide abortions. I guess the “right to an abortion” also trumps our right to exercise our religion.
I’d say this is the start of a slippery slope but I fear we’ve already slid down this slope and now wallow in the mud at the bottom. Imagine these very possible scenarios: You’re a Christian landlord and you don’t want to rent your home to an unmarried or gay couple. Too bad! What about if you’re a Christian business owner and you don’t want to include gay partners on employee benefits? Tough luck! What if the pastor of your church refuses to perform a wedding ceremony for a gay couple? Where does it end? If the CA Supreme Court ruling holds, our protected right to practice our religion is subservient to someone else’s right to “not be discriminated against.” We will be forced by law to engage in activity that violates our religious beliefs. And it’s all being done in the name of “tolerance.”